Elevated Love: Correggio and Michelangelo’s Depictions of The Rape of Ganymede
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronicling the lives of the pagan Gods, Metamorphoses was essentially a compilation of stories based on Greek mythology. As the title suggests, the primary theme throughout the work was that of change and evolution. Suggesting that the process was naturally occurring, the stories also sent the message that in spite of any physical transformation, the soul or spirit would remain fundamentally the same. In short, the world was in constant flux but the soul was not. Although this idea ran throughout the epic poem, Ovid’s story was richly layered and comprised of many other aspects, with various themes continuing throughout the book. One reoccurring theme was that of unrequited love, which often involved one character in aggressive pursuit. Jove, otherwise known as Jupiter in Roman mythology, was the supreme God of the Heavens and though he was married to Juno, he often lusted after the most beautiful of mortals in the earthly realm. This presentation proposes that while Ovid’s Metamorphoses provided a starting point for artists, these Ovidian stories were open to interpretation (and reinterpretation). Similar to religious imagery, which was most dominant at the time, they were constantly adapted in art. Examining two different portrayals of the Rape of Ganymede, one by Correggio and the other by Michelangelo demonstrates how Metamorphoses, as the title implies, was able to continually evolve and remain relevant to the changing social values.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".